THE 2004 CALIFORNIA CIRCLE OF TRUST CAMPAIGN
Senate Bill 1803

In 1981, California enacted a truly foul piece of legislation. This law contained a special exception to sentencing for those convicted of sexual offenses against children: if the perpetrator of the unthinkable act was a family member, he would be eligible for probation (!) Let us briefly explain about this special treatment for those offenders who grow their own victims works...

California Penal Code 288. (a) Any person who willfully and lewdly commits any lewd or lascivious act, including any of the acts constituting other crimes provided for in Part 1, upon or with the body, or any part or member thereof, of a child who is under the age of 14 years, with the intent of arousing, appealing to, or gratifying the lust, passions, or sexual desires of that person or the child, is guilty of a felony and shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for three, six, or eight years. See, also, California PC 288.5, "Continual sexual abuse of a child."

Simple enough, right? This represents a societal judgment that certain offenses against our most vulnerable members require imprisonment, a position virtually every citizen endorses. But watch this...

California Penal Code 285. Persons being within the degrees of consanguinity within which marriages are declared by law to be incestuous and void, who intermarry with each other, or who commit fornication or adultery with each other, are punishable by imprisonment in the state prison.

Needless to say, imprisonment is no longer mandatory. And, perhaps, correctly so, as this law encompasses everything from rape of an infant to [adult] first cousins having sex. But here's where the betrayal of California's children kicks in...

California Penal Code 1203.066. (a) Notwithstanding Section 1203 or any other law, probation shall not be granted to, nor shall the execution or imposition of sentence be suspended for, nor shall a finding bringing the defendant within the provisions of this section be stricken pursuant to Section 1385 for, any of the following persons: (7) A person who is convicted of committing a violation of Section 288 or 288.5 against more than one victim. (8) A person who ... has substantial sexual conduct with a victim who is under 14 years of age. (9) A person who ... used obscene matter.... (c) Paragraphs (7), (8), and (9) of subdivision (a) shall not apply when the court makes all of the following findings: (1) The defendant is the victim's natural parent, adoptive parent, stepparent, relative, or is a member of the victim's household who has lived in the victim's household.

Get it? If a person commits the acts against a child, he (or she) is not eligible for probation ... unless the prosecutor uses his "discretion" to charge him with incest instead of child sexual abuse (!) Nice, huh? The closer the perpetrator is to the victim, the lighter the penalty.

How did this happen? Essentially, the California legislature was specifically urged to pass this "exception" by the testimony of "treatment professionals." They claimed the "exception" was needed to benefit the *victims* (!) You've heard the story a thousand times before: we shouldn't disrupt the "family unit," we don't want the children to feel "guilty" that their parent was incarcerated, we don't want to "take the breadwinner out of the home," incest offenders are "different" from garden-variety pedophiles, etc.

Of course, the sex offender treatment industry bases its "success" on one additional "fact." "Recidivism rates" -- which, of course, refers to *detected* recidivism -- are reported to be lower for incest perpetrators than for other sexual offenders against children. But this, in turn, assumes that detection *capability* is equal -- something we know to be false. Since incest victims remain under the control of their perpetrators -- and since they *already* know that complaining is futile; after all, what happened to the offender when he was convicted the *first* time? -- it is ludicrous to discount the more likely probability ... that incest offenders are better able to avoid detection for subsequent offenses.

The real truth, of course, is that the current California law trivializes the pain of child sexual abuse victims, as if incest was a "lesser" crime than if the same acts had been committed by a stranger. It makes child incest victims into a lower class of citizen, and piously proclaims it does so for their own good. It condones experimenting on children, testing every new "theory" about sex offender rehabilitation on the victims themselves. And who's going to complain ... their *parents*?

But the worst thing about this reprehensible "exception" is this: it rewards those predators who chose to grow their own victims.

The truth, as we both know, is that child sexual abuse by a trusted family member is far more devastating than an attack by a stranger. We know that incest is not "family dysfunction," it is rape-by-extortion, the ultimate abuse of power. And most importantly, we know that the "treatment professionals" would have no clients but for "court referrals." How many incest offenders have you ever heard of who volunteer for "help" *before* the law is involved?

Prosecutors may prefer to have "discretion," since they are judged solely on their conviction rates, and offering such a sweet deal to those who rape their own children guarantees a steady stream of guilty pleas, but this isn't about "records," it is about the long-term consequences of creating a special class of sexual offenders.

This "exception" did not come about by referendum. Imagine putting this proposition to a vote: sexually abuse a neighbor's child -- you go to prison; sexually abuse your *own* child -- get probation. Any politician who endorsed such a law would not have seen a next term. But, in the back rooms, this slimy bill slid right on through.

The just-introduced Senate Bill 1803 will eliminate the "incest exception" in California. It needs support in both houses, on both sides of the aisle. And the key to all that support is *your* support. This law has no chance of passage unless enough people participate in a powerful word-of-mouth campaign. This is the kind of call to action that leaves no excuses. To participate takes almost no time, and doesn't cost a dime. Here's all it takes:

(1) Get all the details about the new law here.

(2) Find out who is representing you in the Senate and the Assembly -- right here.

(3) Send your representatives an email demanding they support this new legislation.

That's all there is to it. If enough citizens step up this time, we can finally eliminate the law that gives a special bonus to those who grow their own victims. Can you please spread the word to everyone you know in California? This is not a "Republican" or "Democrat" issue. A person doesn't need to be "political" to participate. This is about one thing, and one thing only -- protecting children from predators. There won't be any TV spots or billboards or newspaper ads working for us. But if enough citizens take a stand, we can make this happen.

So, please PASS IT ON!